Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751858AbXFWHIP (ORCPT ); Sat, 23 Jun 2007 03:08:15 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751722AbXFWHIC (ORCPT ); Sat, 23 Jun 2007 03:08:02 -0400 Received: from aa012msr.fastwebnet.it ([85.18.95.72]:37781 "EHLO aa012msr.fastwebnet.it" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751598AbXFWHIA (ORCPT ); Sat, 23 Jun 2007 03:08:00 -0400 Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2007 09:06:55 +0200 From: Paolo Ornati To: Alberto Gonzalez Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: Question about fair schedulers Message-ID: <20070623090655.36d1794c@localhost> In-Reply-To: <200706230007.15622.info@gnebu.es> References: <200706230007.15622.info@gnebu.es> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 2.9.1 (GTK+ 2.10.11; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 879 Lines: 25 On Sat, 23 Jun 2007 00:07:15 +0200 Alberto Gonzalez wrote: > My conclusion is that SD behaves as expected: it's more fair. But for a > desktop, shouldn't an "intelligently unfair" scheduler be better? "intelligently unfair" is what the current scheduler is (because of interactivity estimator). When it works (say 90% of the time) the desktop feels really good... but when it doesn't it can be a disaster. Look this for example: http://groups.google.com/group/fa.linux.kernel/browse_thread/thread/6aa5c93c379ae9e1/98ab31c0e6fed2ee?&hl=en#98ab31c0e6fed2ee -- Paolo Ornati Linux 2.6.22-rc5-g0864a4e2 on x86_64 - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/